Tuesday, December 30, 2008

The Star asked bar staff in the Annex to rank various terms for differing stages of drunkenness.

The terms come from a list of 26 compiled by academics that, it turns out, include some many of the bartenders and servers say they would never use, including loopy, blind, lit and shot. It contains one that reminds The Madison's Tyler Martin of steroid use – juiced – and lacks one that he really enjoys: Ruined.

Here they are, from least to most inebriated:

In a yet-to-be published study, college students were asked about their familiarity with 26 slang terms for drunkenness, including: "tipsy," "tanked," "bombed," "loaded," "sloshed," "smashed" and "plastered." The study didn't rank the terms in order of inebriation, so the Star asked local bartenders: If you're sloshed, are you more drunk than if you're smashed? Is being tanked less drunk than being trashed? Answers below.

Sema Sencan, 22, bartender at The James Joyce Irish Pub:

1. Light-headed

2. Buzzed

3. Tipsy

4. Loaded

5. Gone, Wasted, Bombed, Plowed, Ripped

6. Tanked, Sloshed, Inebriated

7. Plastered, Smashed, Hammered

8. Obliterated

9. S--- faced

10. F---ed up

Trevor Bray, 27, bartender at The Pump:

1. Tipsy

2. Inebriated

3. Drunk

4. Tanked

5. Loaded

6. Ripped

7. Trashed

8. Wasted

9. Hammered

10. Obliterated

Tyler Martin, 29, server at The Madison:

1. Trashed

2. Gone

3. Wasted

4. Tanked

5. Plastered

6. Plowed

7. Blind

8. Sloshed

9. S--- faced

10. Obliterated

Research: Iain Marlow

Alcohol researchers should know what it means to be "hammered."

And while they're at it, they should understand being "sloshed," "tipsy" and "wasted" as well.

The point is not to be their own guinea pigs, or to keep up with the spirit of the holiday season.

Rather, a study says scientists looking at alcohol abuse should embrace such colloquial terms for intoxication and insert them into their stuffy research lexicon.

While "drunk" is the standard term used in many questionnaires that assess imbibing levels and patterns among university students and other groups, it fails to capture gradations of inebriation, the paper says.

"Anyone who has consumed alcohol, or even anybody who has not, knows that there is this wide language that is used to describe the intoxicating effects of alcohol," says Ash Levitt, a graduate student in psychology at the University of Missouri.

"And unfortunately ... other alcohol researchers have not really utilized this language, which can be (academically) beneficial," says Levitt, a corresponding author on the paper. The research will appear in the March issue of the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research.

"By using the language we can ... shed better light on the subjective experiences that individuals have when drinking alcohol," Levitt says.

"Often times the subjective experience of drinking and the objective experience of drinking are totally two different things."

Research into drinking patterns and levels often relies solely on self-reporting surveys that limit their questions to the number of drinks consumed over given time periods.

Robert Mann, a senior public health scientist at Toronto's Centre for Addiction and Mental health, says the study is "intriguing" and could provide broader dimensions for alcohol abuse research.

"It certainly shows the range of ways in which people think about ... being intoxicated or how intoxicated they are," Mann says.

The words could help researchers and clinicians understand the levels of their subjects' or patients' inebriation, he says.

But the centre does not use such words in its surveys, limiting them to specific descriptions of amounts consumed or behavioural and cognitive effects of drinking.

"We wouldn't use the kinds of words or adjectives that are used in this paper," he says.

"We would say, 'How often have you consumed alcohol? How many drinks did you have on an (a particular) occasion? How many times have you had five or more drinks on an occasion?' "

But the answers don't tell researchers all they need to know, Levitt says.

"When you ask people how many standard drinks they had and how long it was ... you are going to get objective information," Levitt says.

"What you're not going to get are all these individual differences in how people respond to alcohol,'' he adds.

For example, a 300-pound man will have a different experience with a set amount of alcohol than a petite woman, Levitt says.

"And even adults that weigh the same could still process it differently, based on metabolism, based on the contents in their stomach, based on what they are drinking," he says.

To tease out these personal differences, the study suggests researchers utilize the alcohol slang, which holds as many descriptive words for drunk, it seems, as the Inuit have for snow.

"We can really get a better understanding about the intoxicating effects of alcohol that we might not get from objective measures, and also that we might not get just from using the word 'drunk,' " Levitt says.

"People don't always define 'drunk' in the same way and that's certainly been shown a lot in the literature."

Levitt and his colleagues polled 336 college students, split about equally between the sexes.

Each was asked about their knowledge of common intoxication slang – which included 26 separate words – and how they used them.

Researchers found the word "drunk" was typically used by subjects to describe middling levels of inebriation only.

The slang words, on the other hand, fell on either the moderate or extreme ends of the descriptive intoxication scale.

Men tended to use stronger, heavy-intoxication words such as "hammered," "smashed" and "wasted," while women were more likely to use euphemistic moderate-intoxication terms, like "tipsy."

Women, however, described themselves as "tipsy" after imbibing four drinks over a two-hour period, which is defined as binge drinking for women.

Because they tend to use the less severe description, however, women may perceive their levels of intoxication as being less severe, creating the danger they may drink and drive or participate in other dangerous behaviour, Levitt says.

Most importantly, use of slang would allow researchers to more sensitively assess the level of intoxication research subjects were feeling, Levitt says.

Sunday, December 28, 2008

As prisoner No. 18330-424 (C. Black) might say, it's been a farrago of a year, a cornucopia of the diabolical, the excruciating and the interminable. Worse than a Saturday afternoon at Ikea. That bad.

Still.

It was the beginning of the end for Dubya. We may have needed an Enigma machine to decipher him, but his sense of occasion was always impressive, and 2008 was no different.

"Thank you, Your Holiness. Awesome speech," he assured Pope Benedict at the White House in April. "Yo Harper," he greeted our leader, Steve, at the G8 summit in Japan.

Mindful of his legacy, if a stranger to shame, Dubya told an Israeli reporter he "can predict that historians will say that George W. Bush recognized the threats of the 21st century, clearly defined them, and had great faith in the capacity of liberty to transform hopelessness to hope."

Or the other way round.

Adieu as well to Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion and his impenetrable sense of self-esteem. "I love being the underdog," he boasted. "I love being underestimated." Practice will do that.

Trouble was, Dion didn't do much for the country's self-esteem. On the challenges to Canada's Arctic sovereignty, for example, he off-puttingly noted that "we cannot win against the Americans. We cannot win against the Russians. And we are too civilized to shoot the Danes."

Perhaps that's really why U.S. talk-show host Craig Ferguson, a Scot, chose not to immigrate to Canada, though he said it was because "the U.S. is the party and Canada is the apartment above, saying keep the noise down."

Put a sock in it, Craig.

After all, the Canadian space-time continuum featured a non-stop thriller of an election this year, an almost coalition, a suspension of Parliament – and a Tory insider explaining why Harper keeps such tight reins on his MPs: "Part of the control mentality comes from having a caucus with orangutans in it."

But generally, we had to get our political pleasures vicariously, chiefly via the spectacular rise of the spectacular Barack Obama: "Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time," he said. "We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek."

Not letting the French smoke where they want, however, is an unsought change, more "a total and utter catastrophe," hissed Parisian café owner Chantal Boucher when a ban on smoking in bars and restaurants took effect on Jan. 1. Relax, Madame, and use your imagination, like the Minnesotans. Their new law exempted theatres, so several bars duly became "theatres," with staff and customers as cast and ashtrays as props. Asked why the "cast" was just sitting around smokin' and drinkin', one barkeep explained: "They're playing themselves before the smoking law. We call the production Before the Ban."

Several dozen people reported seeing a UFO with bright lights flying low and fast over Stephenville, Tex., in January. Some reported fighter jets chasing it.

"You hear about big bass or big buck in the area, but this is a different deal," surmised local Ricky Sorrells. "It feels good to hear that other people saw something because that means I'm not crazy." Not necessarily, Ricky.

A series of shootings in Toronto's Entertainment District led to an other-worldish attempt by Councillor Adam Vaughan to allay citizens' concerns: "There's a light at the end of the tunnel. And it's not a strobe light coming from the next club, but a better tomorrow."

Or, of course, an oncoming train.

Speaking of which, after somehow winning back Italy's presidency, the extraordinary Silvio (no thought unspoken) Berlusconi was as eccentric as ever, appointing a former topless model who opposes gay couplings as equal opportunities minister. He also praised newly elected Obama as "handsome, young and tanned" and, when clobbered by embarrassed Italians, insisted he'd meant "tanned" as a compliment.

Actually, one wonders if it's his wife, Veronica, who's barking. For the second year running, she wrote to a Rome newspaper after it reported Silvio had told several women at a party, "If I wasn't married, I would marry you straight away."

This was a "declaration that I see as damaging to my dignity and cannot be treated as just a joke. I am asking for a public apology as I have not received one in private."

Just get a billboard, Veronica. And leave it up.

Meanwhile, France's ambitious new president, Nicolas Sarkozy – scarcely Adonis, but with a certain diminutive charm – pulled off a considerable political PR coup by marrying the beauteous ex-model and sometime singer Carla Bruni, who was immediately hailed as the next Jackie Kennedy. She wasn't there, however, during Obama's lightning visit to Paris in July, "which disappointed all my staff," the golden one admitted. Meeting Carla "was the only thing they were really interested in."

Alas, Miles Kington, the Brit who popularized franglais back in the '70s, joined the choir invisible this year. Use as many French words as you can, Kington advised tourists, fill in the rest with English, then say the lot with absolute conviction.

Saluting his passing, writer Karl Mamer noted that when many Anglo-Canadians visit Quebec, they offer franglais as a kind of peace offering: "Look, I'm going to try speaking as much French as possible, showing you I'm making a sufficient effort, then (would) you please switch to your fluent English as soon as I've linguistically self-flagellated myself before you."

The market meltdown and accelerating recession may not have hit the West until this fall, but one Wall Street broker saw it coming in 2003, and quit to become a monk. In Bulgaria. As one does.

Now a quasi-humanitarian and apparent amnesiac, Brother Nikanor had this to say about the rest of us: "It is right to see people who consume more than they deserve shattered by a financial crisis ... to suffer so that they can become more reasonable."

That doesn't always work. To wit, disgraced media mogul Conrad Black began his six-year jail sentence, but not before issuing a characteristic missive: "They will have their fleeting moment of brutish triumph. A moron who actually seriously looks at this case sees that it is a crock and I expect it will ultimately be determined to be so." Or not, Lord B, or not.

Still on the audacity front, Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe had the gall to show up at the Rome world food crisis summit in June: "This," snapped a U.K. official, "is like Pol Pot going to a human rights conference."

Former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic was finally caught in July and charged with war crimes, including genocide. On his first day in court, he said he would represent himself with the aid of "an invisible adviser." To deal, presumably, with the invisible evidence in his defence.

In a year replete with free-flying insults, Hillary Clinton suffered sexist attacks for crying – she teared up – tearing up early in her campaign. What she was saying when she did: "I have had so many opportunities from this country, I just don't want us to fall backwards. This is very personal for me. It's not just political. It's not just public. ... I see what's happening. And we have to reverse it." Such a girl.

But husband Bill got his, too. Writer Todd Purdom monstered his "cavernous narcissism" in Vanity Fair: "He is the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral he attends."

After U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attacked China's crackdown on Tibet, Beijing officials responded by calling her "habitually bad-tempered." Like they should talk.

In his review of the admittedly ludicrous Sex and the City, the 122-year-old New York Post movie critic Rex Reed felt moved to write that "there's nothing wrong with Sarah Jessica Parker that couldn't be cured by wart-removal surgery."

In sentencing three women to jail for mugging a man and stealing his wallet, an English judge gratuitously called them "a bunch of over-the-hill slappers." They're only in their 30s, sniffed an aggrieved friend.

Even Britain's poet laureate, Andrew Motion, was in a grumpy mood, saying the role was "very, very damaging to my work. It's been a hiding to nothing."

Don't know what he can mean, given that the job consists mainly of poeticizing royal events. He had Prince Philip to work with, for a start. Visiting Slovenia last month, the Duke of Edinburgh advised the locals not to encourage tourism because it's "just national prostitution." And what about an aide's update on Prince Chulls who turned 60? "He is ever more fussy, ratty and irascible."

Or the handwritten note from the Queen Mother to her "backstairs page" that was auctioned in the summer: "I think I will take two small bottles of Dubonnet and gin with me this morning, in case it is needed."

It was always needed. She lived to be 102. The note sold for $30,000.

There, Mr. Motion, is a haiku (of sorts). Easy.

Prince Harry's undisclosed tour of duty in Afghanistan was cut short when the Drudge Report broke a news blockade inexplicably adhered to by the U.K. tabs. Harry was forgiving: "All my wishes have come true. It's very nice to be sort of a normal person for once. I think it's about as normal as I'm going to get."

But what, Harry, is normal these days?

"If you're in a family with two animals and they want to unite in a wedding, it is not a sign of the apocalypse," said U.S. pet counsellor-cum-chaplain Rev. Shirley Scott. Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass's reaction: "Remember when Americans were asking why Islamo-fascists hate us so much? Now you know."

The U.K.'s stodgy, taciturn PM, Gordon Brown, said it was "absolutely correct" to compare him to Heathcliff, the passionate anti-hero of Wuthering Heights, although "an older Heathcliff, a wiser Heathcliff." No, Gordon, not even close.

Six months before they split, Madonna spoke of her "amazing" sex life with husband Guy Ritchie: "We lie right next to each other with our BlackBerrys under our pillows. It's not unromantic ... I'm sure loads of couples have their BlackBerrys in bed with them." No, Madge, not actually in the bed.

Her view on foreign policy, for example, was semi-articulated to ABC's Charles Gibson: "We must not, Charlie, blink, because, Charlie, as I've said, Charlie, before, John McCain has said that – and remember here, Charlie, we're talking about John McCain who, Charlie, is John McCain and I won't be blinking, Charlie."

As for ratcheting up war: "Nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be-all, end-all of just too many people in too many parts of our planet." Well, not too much of the be-all, mostly the end-all.

When Palin called him a dictator, Venezuela President Hugo Chavez, no mean speechifier himself, responded: " ... The poor thing, you have to feel sorry for her. She is a beauty queen that they've put in the role of a figurine. Forgive her, for she knows not what she says." Figurine?

The day after Obama's victory, the huge demand for newspapers inspired a poignant New York Times editorial: "That long, patient line of New Yorkers was a little flame of comfort to warm a newspaper person's troubled heart. People like to say that print is a withering industry ... But for crying out loud, when something big happens, don't you miss the paper?"

But never mind, never mind. Let's draw a veil over 2008 before we all lose the will to live, and enter 2009 as optimists, low-flying to be sure, but ascendant nonetheless.

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

AFTER YEARS OF TELLING PEOPLE CHEMOTHERAPY IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRY (TRY THE KEY WORD) AND ELIMINATE CANCER, JOHN HOPKINS IS FINALLY STARTING TO TELL YOU THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE WAY .

Cancer Update from John Hopkins:1. Every person has cancer cells in the body. These cancer cells do not show up in the standard tests until they have multiplied to a few billion. When doctors tell cancer patients that there are no more cancer cells in their bodies after treatment, it just means the tests are unable to detect the cancer cells because they have not reached the detectable size.2. Cancer cells occur between 6 to more than 10 times in a person's lifetime.

3. When the person's immune system is strong the cancer cells will be destroyed and prevented from multiplying and forming tumours.

4. When a person has cancer it indicates the person has multiple nutritional deficiencies. These could be due to genetic, environmental, food and lifestyle factors.

8. Initial treatment with chemotherapy and radiation will often reduce tumor size. However prolonged use of chemotherapy and radiation do not result in more tumor destruction.

9. When the body has too much toxic burden from chemotherapy and radiation the immune system is either compromised or destroyed, hence the person can succumb to various kinds of infections and complications.

10. Chemotherapy and radiation can cause cancer cells to mutate and become resistant and difficult to destroy. Surgery can also cause cancer cells to spread to other sites.

11. An effective way to battle cancer is to starve the cancer cells by not feeding it with the foods it needs to multiply.

CANCER CELLS FEED ON:a. Sugar is a cancer-feeder. By cutting off sugar it cuts off one important food supply to the cancer cells. Sugar substitutes like NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, etc are made with Aspartame and it is harmful. A better natural substitute would be Manuka honey or molasses but only in very small amounts. Table salt has a chemical added to make it white in colour. Better alternative is Bragg's aminos or sea salt.

b. Milk causes the body to produce mucus, especially in the gastro-intestinal tract. Cancer feeds on mucus. By cutting off milk and substituting with unsweetened soya milk cancer cells are being starved.

c. Cancer cells thrive in an acid environment. A meat-based diet is acidic and it is best to eat fish, and a little chicken rather than beef or pork. Meat also contains livestock antibiotics, growth hormones and parasites, which are all harmful, especially to people with cancer.

d. A diet made of 80% fresh vegetables and juice, whole grains, seeds, nuts and a little fruits help put the body into an alkaline environment. About 20% can be from cooked food including beans. Fresh vegetable juices provide live enzymes that are easily absorbed and reach down to cellular levels within 15 minutes to nourish and enhance growth of healthy cells. To obtain live enzymes for building healthy cells try and drink fresh vegetable juice (most vegetables including bean sprouts) and eat some raw vegetables 2 or 3 times a day. Enzymes are destroyed at temperatures of 104 degrees F (40 degrees C).

e. Avoid coffee, tea, and chocolate, which have high caffeine. Green tea is a better alternative and has cancer-fighting properties. Water- best to drink purified water, or filtered, to avoid known toxins and heavy metals in tap water. Distilled water is acidic, avoid it.

12. Meat protein is difficult to digest and requires a lot of digestive enzymes. Undigested meat remaining in the intestines become putrified and leads to more toxic buildup.

13. Cancer cell walls have a tough protein covering. By refraining from or eating less meat it frees more enzymes to attack the protein walls of cancer cells and allows the body's killer cells to destroy the cancer cells.

14. Some supplements build up the immune system (IP6, Flor ssence,Essiac, anti-oxidants, vitamins, minerals, EFAs etc.) to enable the body's own killer cells to destroy cancer cells. Other supplements like vitamin E are known to cause apoptosis, or programmed cell death, the body's normal method of disposing of damaged, unwanted, or unneeded cells.

15. Cancer is a disease of the mind, body, and spirit. A proactive and positive spirit will help the cancer warrior be a survivor. Anger, un forgiveness and bitterness put the body into a stressful and acidic environment. Learn to have a loving and forgiving spirit. Learn to relax and enjoy life.

1 6. Cancer cells cannot thrive in an oxygenated environment. Exercising daily, and deep breathing help to get more oxygen down to the cellular level. Oxygen therapy is another means employed to destroy cancer cells.(PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO PEOPLE YOU CARE ABOUT)CANCER UPDATE FROM JOHN HOPKINS HOSPITAL , U. S. -PLEASE READ1. No plastic containers in micro.2. No water bottles in freezer.3. No plastic wrap in microwave.

Johns Hopkins has recently sent this out in its newsletters. This information is being circulated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center as well. Dioxin chemicals causes cancer, especially breast cancer.Dioxins are highly poisonous to the cells of our bodies. Don't freeze your plastic bottles with water in them as this releases dioxins from the plastic. Recently, Dr. Edward Fujimoto, Wellness Program Manager at Castle Hospital was on a TV program to explain this health hazard.

He talked about dioxins and how bad they are for us. He said that we should not be heating our food in the microwave using plastic containers. This especially applies to foods that contain fat. He said that the combination of fat, high heat, and plastics releases dioxin into the food and ultimately into the cells of the body. Instead, he recommends using glass, such as CorningWare, Pyrex or ceramic containers for heating food. You get the same results, only without the dioxin. So such things as TV dinners, instant ramen and soups, etc., should be removed from the container and heated in something else. Paper isn't bad but you don't know what is in the paper. It's just safer to use tempered glass, Corning Ware, etc. He reminded us that a while ago some of the fast food restaurants moved away from the foam containers to paper. The dioxin problem is one of the reasons.

Also, he pointed out that plastic wrap, such as Saran, is just as dangerous when placed over foods to be cooked inthe microwave. As the food is nuked, the high heat causes poisonous toxins to actually melt out of the plastic wrap and drip into the food. Cover food with a paper towel instead.

This is an article that should be sent to anyone important in your life.

This is an excerpt from the book "Dumbing Down our Kids" by educator Charles Sykes.

It is a list of eleven things you did not learn in school and directed at high school and college grads.

RULE 1 Life is not fair - get used to it.

RULE 2 The world won't care about your self-esteem. The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.

RULE 3 You will NOT make 40 thousand dollars a year right out of high school. You won't be a vice president with car phone, until you earn both.

RULE 4 If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss. He doesn't have tenure.

RULE 5 Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your grandparents had a different word for burger flipping they called it Opportunity.

RULE 6 If you mess up,it's not your parents' fault, so don't whine about your mistakes, learn from them.

RULE 7 Before you were born, your parents weren't as boring as they are now. They got that way from paying your bills, cleaning your clothes and listening to you talk about how cool you are. So before you save the rain forest from the parasites of your parent's generation, try delousing the closet in your own room.

RULE 8 Your school may have done away with winners and losers, but life has not. In some schools they have abolished failing grades and they'll give you as many times as you want to get the right answer. This doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.

RULE 9 Life is not divided into semesters. You don't get summers off and very few employers are interested in helping you find yourself. Do that on your own time.

RULE 10 Television is NOT real life. In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.

I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future--for reducing this threat or living with it--there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security--a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.

This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President--two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.

The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security.

Today no war has been declared--and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.

Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security--and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.

For the facts of the matter are that this nation's foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation's covert preparations to counter the enemy's covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money.

The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.

The question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.

On many earlier occasions, I have said--and your newspapers have constantly said--that these are times that appeal to every citizen's sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal.

I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all.

Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: "Is it news?" All I suggest is that you add the question: "Is it in the interest of the national security?" And I hope that every group in America--unions and businessmen and public officials at every level-- will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.

And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.

Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.

II

It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation--an obligation which I share. And that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people--to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well--the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.

No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it.

III

It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world's efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.

And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.

In the 2004 U.S. Presidential election, both the Democratic and Republican nominees were alumni. George W. Bush writes in his autobiography, "[In my] senior year I joined Skull and Bones, a secret society; so secret, I can't say anything more."[3] When asked what it meant that he and Bush were both Bonesmen, former Presidential candidate John Kerry said, "Not much because it's a secret."[4][5]

The emblem of Skull and Bones is a skull with crossed bones, over the number "322". Some have speculated that 322 stands for "founded in '32, 2nd corps", referring to a first Corps in some unknown German university which has never been found. Others suggest that 322 refers to the era of Demosthenes and that documents in the society hall have purportedly been found dated to "Anno-Demostheni".[9]

Monday, December 15, 2008

How Many Times Can Jehovah Be Wrong?So many dates and predictions so many errors by his faithful and discrete slave,When Rutherford contradicted Russell about the Pyramid Of Giza...that proved that Jehovah's Witnesses were NOT directed by almighty God.When the dates 1874,1914,1925,1975 failed they were proven as false profits.Source

1st Russell2nd Rutherford

TWO dates stand out prominently in the minds of Bible Students enlightened by present truth. These are 1874 and 1914. More then a century and 1/4 has passed since 1874, and almost a century since 1914. Because of this passing of so many years beyond the time when it was supposed our hopes would be fully realized, the brethren are naturally concerned as to the meaning of this long delay. Various views are being expressed as to what developments there actually have been in the divine plan during this unexpectedly long end-of-the-age period, and what aspects of the divine plan still remain to be fulfilled.

Both Disagreed on Giza

The founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses, Charles Taze Russell, also believed in pyramidology. He used it to supplement the Scriptures in predicting Christ's return. After Russell's death, Judge Rutherford took over their organization. He didn't care for pyramidology and moved the main body of Witnesses to reject it. This led to splits within their church.

[In 1928] Rutherford...openly condemned resorting to non-biblical sources in the attempt to discover the will and plan of God. He specifically mentioned the Great Pyramid as an example. This provoked violent criticism from older members of the movement who had grown up under Russell's teaching and many of them withdrew (Charles S. Braden, These Also Believe, New York: Macmillan, 1949, 362. See also Edward Charles Gruss, Apostles of Denial, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978, 61-2).

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the Watchtower world is the deliberatetolerance of sexual predators within "Jehovah's organization". Despite their denial,Jehovah's Witnesses are trapped in an organization which tolerates disgusting anddeplorable behavior. I'd like to introduce myself before we start discussing this issueof pedophilia My name is Mark H. Palo and I am a former Jehovah's Witness of almostforty years. Twice I have been a victim of pedophile molestations at the hands of twodifferent Jehovah's Witnesses. that is rampant amongst the religious group known as Jehovah'sWitnesses. I was between the age of ten and twelve years old. Mymolesters where never caught or punished. Presently I am fifty-seven years old andhold an associates degree in Human Services and am attending The University ofMassachusetts, Lowell, majoring in psycho/sociology. I hold a 3.8 GPA and holdhigh honors by being accepted into the Phi Theta Kappa Society. At this time I workat a Substance Abuse Clinic as a Consumer Advocate. My job is to see that all theclients are given fair and timely treatment. I handle client issues, concerns, and workto attain their city, state and federal benefits.

“All who cut loose from the Society and its work, instead of prospering themselves or upbuilding others in the faith and in the graces of the spirit, seemingly do the reverse—attempt injury to the Cause they once served, and, with more or less noise, gradually sink into oblivion, harming only themselves and others possessed of a similarly contentious spirit. . . .

If some think that they can get as good or better provender at other tables, or that they can produce as good or better themselves—let these take their course. . . .

But while we are willing that others should go anywhere and everywhere to find food and light to their satisfaction, strange to say, those who become our opponents take a very different course. Instead of saying in the manly fashion of the world, ‘I have found something which I prefer; goodbye!’ these manifest anger, malice, hatred, strife, ‘works of the flesh and of the devil’ such as we have never known worldly people to exhibit.

They seem inoculated with madness, Satanic hydrophobia [rabies]. Some of them smite us and then claim that we did the smiting. They are ready to say and write contemptible falsities and to stoop to do meanness.”

Pastor Charles Taze Russell and the WTB&TS, Bible Students to Jehovah's Witnesses.

Charles Russell was the founder of The Watchtower Society and The Watch Tower magazine.

He was not the founder of Jehovah’s Witnesses.But he was Jehovah's choice apparently , whereas Rutherford was a boozer and a thief who changed the beliefs of Gods Faithful witness, the WTB+TS Mission (italics mine)

"So the claim is that after his death in 1916 many Bible Students no longer wanted to work with the WTB&TS, these retained the name Bible Students."

"Others wanted to move forward so in 1931, they embraced the new name Jehovah’s Witnesses. Worldwide, the Witnesses number 7,000,000 members. The Bible Students have no head office, and have split into a number of different factions." They moved on to a cult status and changed the major beliefs to those preached by false profet Ruthford.

"It appears that in 1966 the Dawn Bible Students Association published a small booklet that caused divisions within the Bible Student ranks, however divisions and infighting are nothing new with the "so called" Bride of Christ. The Dawn Bible Students tried to show that not all of Pastor Russell’s views were correct, but other would not hear of it, because they view Pastor Russell as The Faithful and Wise Servant, The Laodicean Messenger, and The Man with the Secretary’s Ink Horn. Even today, many Bible Students wish that this little booklet would just go away."http://pastorrussell.blogspot.com/

Of the alleged 946 predictions attributed to Nostradamus, only about 70 are considered to have had some kind of fulfillment. That works out to less than a 7-percent success rate. However, regarding the ‘successes,’ M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia comments that many are considered to be the “bold forgeries” of his interpreters, including the prediction of his own death. Others were “composed after the events to which they seem designed to refer.” Some are “strained” in their application and some are shown to have ‘fulfillments’ in a number of different events.Keep in mind that n his efforts to predict the future, Nostradamus was deeply involved in horoscopy, magic, astrology and the pagan ritual of incantation.Source

Prophecies strangely accomplished- It is not meant that there is anything more than an accidental coincdence between the prophecies of Nostradamus and the events by which they have been ostensibly verified. The verification is ascribed to no inspiration, to no natural or supernatural endowments, to no astrology, to no other science or art, but to thatof Nostradamus's renown-to luck ( Diva Fortuna).

McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

A surprise visit by US President George Bush to Iraq has been overshadowed by an incident in which two shoes were thrown at him during a news conference.

An Iraqi journalist was wrestled to the floor by security guards after he called Mr Bush "a dog" and threw his footwear, just missing the president.

The US president has now continued to Afghanistan to inspect troops there.

He arrived before dawn at Bagram air force base, and is due to hold talks with President Hamid Karzai.

Earlier in Baghdad, Mr Bush and Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki signed the new security agreement between their countries.

The pact calls for US troops to leave Iraq in 2011 - eight years after the 2003 invasion that has in part defined the Bush presidency.

Speaking just over five weeks before he hands over power to Barack Obama, Mr Bush also said the war in Iraq was not over and more work remained to be done.

His previously unannounced visit came a day after Defence Secretary Robert Gates told US troops the Iraq mission was in its "endgame".

'Size 10'

In the middle of the news conference with Mr Maliki, Iraqi television journalist Muntadar al-Zaidi stood up and shouted "this is a goodbye kiss from the Iraqi people, dog," before hurling a shoe at Mr Bush which narrowly missed him.

Showing the soles of shoes to someone is a sign of contempt in Arab culture.

Muntadar al-Zaidi was quickly wrestled to the ground and hauled away

With his second shoe, which the president also managed to dodge, Mr Zaidi said: "This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq."

Mr Zaidi, a correspondent for Cairo-based al-Baghdadiya TV, was then wrestled to the ground by security personnel and hauled away.

Al-Baghdadiya's bureau chief told the Associated Press that he had no idea what prompted Mr Zaidi to attack President Bush, although reports say he was once kidnapped by a militia and beaten up.

"I am trying to reach Muntadar since the incident, but in vain," said Fityan Mohammed. "His phone is switched off."

Correspondents said the attack was symbolic. Iraqis threw shoes and used them to beat Saddam Hussein's statue after his overthrow.

'American security'

Mr Bush's first stop upon arriving in Baghdad was the Iraqi presidential palace in the heavily-fortified Green Zone, where he held talks with President Jalal Talabani.

"The work hasn't been easy but it's been necessary for American security, Iraqi hope and world peace," Mr Bush said during his talks with Mr Talabani.

The Iraqi president called Mr Bush "a great friend for the Iraqi people, who helped us liberate our country".

The BBC's Humphrey Hawksley, in Baghdad, says the key issue at present is exactly how American troops will withdraw within the next three years and what sort of Iraq they will leave behind.

President Bush said events have been necessary for US security and world peace

The US media has just published details of a US government report saying that post invasion reconstruction of Iraq was crippled by bureaucratic turf wars and an ignorance of the basic elements of Iraqi society.

The report is circulating among US officials in draft form, says the New York Times.

It reveals details of a reconstruction effort that cost more than $100bn (£67bn) and only succeeded in restoring what was destroyed in the invasion and the widespread looting that followed it, the newspaper said.

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Phenomenon

Starting in October 2007 he appeared as a judge on Phenomenon, with Uri Geller and in a CNN interview about the show he told Larry King "no one has the ability, that I'm aware of, to do anything supernatural, psychic, talk to the dead. And that was what I said I was going to do with Phenomenon. If somebody goes on that show and claims to have supernatural psychic ability, I'm going to bust [him] live and on television."[12]

On the October 31, 2007 episode of the reality show Phenomenon, Paranormalist Jim Callahan performed a summoning, purportedly of author Raymond Hill, to help discover the contents of a locked box.[13] Although fellow judge Uri Geller praised the performance, Angel called it "comical" and subsequently challenged both Callahan and Geller to guess the contents of two envelopes he pulled out of his pocket, offering a million dollars of his own money to whomever could do so. This led to an argument between Callahan and Angel, during which Callahan accused Angel of being an "ideological bigot", and after Angel rose from his chair and approached Callahan, the two were pulled apart as the show promptly went to a commercial break. Angel has since revealed the contents of one envelope and at the unveiling he challenged Geller one more time. Geller was unsuccessful, and the envelope was revealed to contain an index card with the numbers "911" printed on it for September 11, 2001. Criss' explanation was this: "If on 9-10 somebody could have predicted that 9-11 was going to happen, they could have saved thousands of lives". The other envelope's contents will be revealed on the first episode of Season 4 of Criss Angel: Mindfreak.

"I will give you a million dollars of my personal money right now if either one of you can tell me specific details of what’s in [this envelope] right now." While Geller ignored Angel's challenge, Callahan started to confront Angel in a hostile manner, as host Tim Vincent held him back and Geller held Angel back.

In “Believe” (which takes its name from the last word supposedly uttered by legendary magician Harry Houdini before his death), Angel, according to the official Cirque Web site, “stars as a surreal, enigmatic Victorian Noble. Along a path of imaginative exploration, he encounters Kayala and Crimson, two women who represent different aspects of femininity, four bizarre Ushers, who will introduce the audience to the baroque theater of Criss' mind and a high-energy troupe of characters and dancers who mix a multitude of styles into a high-energy visual feast, punctuated by moments of grace and sensuality.”

That’s a far cry from Angel’s most famous incarnation, that of goth bad-boy on his shocking A&E cable series “Mindfreak.” Angel will now be stepping up to bat in a town famous for its megaproduction shows and its magicians, most notably the iconic Sigfried & Roy and the perennial David Copperfield. Is he ready for a 10-year commitment — with 4,600 shows on the schedule?

CRISS ANGEL Believe, by Cirque du Soleil is a haunting exploration deep inside the inventive mind of mystifier Criss Angel as he hovers between the land of the living and a surreal world uniquely woven together by the distinctive imaginations of Criss Angel and Cirque du Soleil.

Unlike traditional magic-themed shows, CRISS ANGEL Believe transcends any preconceived notion of what it means to be emotionally engaged by the arts of mysticism and illusion. The show is a fantasy, an allegory, a highly theatrical tableau of mood, reverie and emotion set against a backdrop of dreamlike darkness and light.

I have been a big fan of Criss Angel since he magically appeared on A+E a few years ago.I have just returned from Las Vegas where I went to his show BeLIEve at the Luxor hotel where I stayed.

He just signed a 10 year contract with the Luxor, and the critics are starting to cook him in the press...

I must say as a fan I was not impressed and disappointed, he lacks showmanship and has a potty mouth, and doesn't know how to use a hand held microphone (Criss must be taught how to use a hand held microphone...placing ones mouth on metal sounds terrible, he cackles, crackles and his slurs and diction vanishes.

From the cheap seats where I sat, 100.00 per ticket x 2 the Dark Angel appeared very human with Cirque wires and the stage holes showing. (I'm an amatuer magician, so his opening act with birds from his sleeves was kids birthday party magic-sad!)

The WOW effect of the A+E shows of his in your face no where to hide style of magic has disappeared! Even his signature version of Metamorphosis had too much smoke and the illusion vanished.

Criss Angels greatest magic vanish appears to be his making his audiance disappear long before his 10 year contract vanishes.

Gone were the astounding levitation of audiance members we witnessed during his Mind Freak show, gone were the walking thru glass effect in broad daylight.

And the show is pale in comparison to others in Las Vegas magic shows, Too Little WOW Magic and Too Much Cirque Du So Low.

He now must be compared to the stage performances of David Copperfield ,Lance Burton,Lance Burton Master Magician, Monte Carlo, Las VegasPenn and Teller,Nathan Burton Comedy Magic,Rick Thomas, The Magic of Rick Thomas at the Tropicana, Las Vegas,Steve Wyric, Steve Wyric at the Aladdin Casino & Resort.

Yes...Im still a fan, in spite of his apparent use of green screen technology.

I'm still in awe of Criss's Lexor levitation thru the use of hologram projection over the Luxor Pyramid beam on mind freak (see video in this post).

I even forgive him for his use of CGI Hollywood style camera illusions.

In magic we must suspend our disbelief, but BeLIEve is a Lie and the cost to Criss may be 10 years of torture on stage at the luxor Theatre.

but I'm still a fan of his Mindfreak illusions!The Survival Journals

"The single most amazing thing about BeLIEve is that it's so boring. For a reported $100 million, Cirque has bought itself its first bona fide bomb.Las Vegas Sun"

Walter Huertas lives in Las Vegas and has seen every Cirque show here. On a scale of 1 to 10, he gave it a 1. He coaxed a friend to go. They left 20 minutes before the end of Friday's debut.

"There's no magic in it," Huertas said.

Huertas knows Angel for his "antics" and death-defying stunts from his "Mindfreak" show on A&E. But he said "Believe" has no compelling storyline, and it's more about dancing and unimpressive tricks, like pulling doves from a sleeve.

"It's something that should be in a variety show," he said. "It's about a bunch of 'rabbits' dancing around in costume."

Huertas equated the quality of "Believe" to that of Mandalay Bay's disastrous old "Storm" show. If you ever saw "Storm," you realize how dismal that comparison is.

Two other Angel fans, Steve Moffett and Jordan Wilson, flew in from London for Friday's debut.

"We were hysterical about coming. We came. It was a waste of time," Wilson said. "The magic's not even magic."

They complained they could see wires and stage holes used in unconvincing acts.

"Belief was not suspended once," said Moffett, who called the show a "dead end." "They fake an accident at the beginning, and it sets the tone of the rest of the show -- fake."

They thought he was lip-syncing. Ranger did, too: "I'm a musician. It's lip-syncing. The audio wasn't matching the video."

On a scale of 1 to 10, Moffett gave it a 4; Wilson a 3.

Like most people I interviewed, they thought Cirque's background elements were great. Wilson said the red-motif set design is "phenomenal," costumes are "good," the dancers are fine, and the proscenium arches are "elegant."

Kevin Saum of Chicago added, "The Cirque music is awesome."

But despite the best elements, Angel's show is appalling, Saum said. On a scale of 1 to 10, Saum deemed it a 3.

"It's embarrassing to put the Cirque name on it," Saum said. "He walks around the whole time and doesn't do anything. It's not his TV show. It's just really bad."

Saum and his friend Ranger flew in for a "bro's" weekend, specifically to see "Believe" plus Foo Fighters at the Hard Rock. They loved Foo Fighters. They hated "Believe" so much Ranger exited the theater by calling out to random people in the Luxor to not see it.

Criss Angel fans flew in from as far away as London to see his new Cirque du Soleil show open at the Luxor on Friday. The verdict by many? Creatively, "Believe" is a possibly unsalvageable "waste of time" and a "dead end" that literally bored some audience members to sleep.

People streamed out of the theater on Saturday screaming about how poor it was. A group of six women was led by a woman yelling furiously, demanding their money back.

"Dude, it's a train wreck," Ranger said. On a scale of 1 to 10, he declared "Believe" a zero.

Friday, December 12, 2008

I was in Las Vegas for 5 Days and 4 Nights. Just enough entertainment and a break from cold weather in Canada. The trip was so cheap, hotels and airline packages you wont believe i.e. Sunwing Was the airline I chose: http://www.sunwing.ca/

The Supreme Court will soon receive urgent requests to determine whether Barack Obama meets natural-born citizenship requirements under the U.S. Constitution – in the form of more 60,138 letters.

The shipment includes 6,682 FedEx packages of nine letters each that will be delivered before the court reviews a case Friday challenging the eligibility of Barack Obama under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution, which stipulates the position can only be filled by "a natural born citizen."

"If we didn't do everything possible to let the Supreme Court justices know what a concern this is to millions of Americans, I would feel like I was letting down the Constitution and the men who framed it – not to mention every citizen of the United States living now and in the future," said Joseph Farah, WND's founder and editor. "This constitutional eligibility test has become a key issue with me because if the plain language of the Constitution is no longer taken seriously by our nation's controlling legal authorities, we have become an outlaw nation – no longer under the rule of law but under the rule of men."

Farah personally drafted the letter that has been sent to the justices above the name and address of participants in the program.

Farah launched a petition drive on WND three weeks ago that calls on all controlling legal authorities to ensure the Constitution is followed on the question of eligibility and for full public disclosure of the facts of Obama's birthplace and parentage. More than 153,000 people have signed on to the petition so far.

Obama has claimed in his autobiography and elsewhere that he was born in Hawaii in 1961 to parents Barack Hussein Obama Sr., a Kenyan national, and Stanley Ann Dunham, a minor. But details about which hospital handled the birth and other details provided on the complete birth certificate have been withheld by Obama despite lawsuits and public demands for release.

(Story continues below)

The letters have been individually addressed to each justice over the names and addresses of those who take part in the limited-time program. The body of the letter reads:

Dear Associate Justice ______:

If the Constitution doesn't mean precisely what it says, then America is no longer a nation under the rule of law.

A nation no longer under the rule of law is, by definition, under the rule of men.

Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution clearly stipulates "No person except a natural born Citizen" shall be eligible to serve as president of the United States. That statement has clear meaning, and the Supreme Court of the United States is one of the controlling legal authorities in ensuring that the Constitution is enforced – even if doing so may prove awkward.

With the Electoral College set to make its determination Dec. 15 that Barack Hussein Obama Jr. be the next president of the United States, the Supreme Court is holding a conference Friday to review a case challenging his eligibility for the office based on Article 2, Section 1.

I urge you to take this matter most seriously – and judge it only on the clear, unambiguous words of the Constitution: A president must, at the very least, be a "natural born citizen" of the United States.

If you agree that this clear constitutional requirement still matters, the Supreme Court must use its authority to establish, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that Barack Hussein Obama Jr. qualifies for the office under that standard.

There is grave, widespread and rapidly growing concern throughout the American public that this constitutional requirement is being overlooked and enforcement neglected by state and federal election authorities. It's up to the Supreme Court to dispel all doubt that America's next president is truly a natural born citizen of the United States.

I urge you to honor the Constitution in this matter and uphold the public trust.

amazon deals 2

Live Face On Web

CNN.com - Most Popular

Oddee -

CNN.com Recently Published/Updated

Amazon Deals

Cluster Map

Google Search

About Me

The late great comedian George Carlin once said "life's a beach"...the world is changing at an alarming rate, for some , its a life or death struggle and for others its another media event on the nightly news, like the 44th President Barack Obamas landslide win in the worst world economy since the 1929 crash. And the killing of Osama by Obama!
and in 2016 Trump 45th President Of The USA. Bush's Republican playbook.
This blog is this bloggers effort to chronicle history as its being made,I will attempt to blog the events that fall under the categories of being strange,weird,curious,mediocre and the most significant events of your life and mine. These grabbed headlines during the years of your lifetime and mine.